Article — Wouters, Manual of Moral Theology
Article IV. On the One Hearing Detraction
I. He who positively influences detraction, for example by asking, laughing, or applauding, sins against justice. Yet sufficiently probably he sins only slightly who fishes out the crime of the neighbor without the intention of divulging it (n. 1069; St. Alphonsus, III, 979).
II. He who only internally rejoices over detraction sins against charity with respect to the defamed person; likewise with respect to the defamer, insofar as he omits fraternal correction in a case in which he is held to it (St. Alphonsus, loc. cit.).
III. He who does not rejoice over detraction as such, but over the hearing of a new thing, or over curious knowledge of the crimes of others, or over the witty manner of narrating, or over the thing narrated as amusing, is excused at least from mortal sin (St. Alphonsus, loc. cit.).
IV. He who does not impede detraction which he can easily impede sins against charity. But practically the obligation at least grave of positively impeding often is absent, "because in this matter of detraction it can be most difficult to establish that correction would be profitable, and from another source detractors corrected before others are very easily offended; indeed there is danger that they would rather increase or confirm the detraction. ... But according to all, those are excused even from venial sin who, noticing the detraction, either depart, or divert the conversation, or turn away the face or show it sad" (St. Alphonsus, III, 981). The contrary must be said about a Superior who does not impede detraction, namely:
The Superior of the defamer per se is held from charity, even more than others, to correct the subject; indeed even from justice, if he is the pastor, although he is not the Superior, or the Bishop of the defamer. But with respect to a defamer who is not a subject he is held no otherwise than others are.
The Superior of the defamed person likewise per se is held, even more than others, from charity to impede the evil of the subject; not, however, from justice, even if he is his pastor or Bishop, because from that virtue he is not held to attend to the temporal good of the subject (St. Alphonsus, loc. cit.).
But what if the Superior has not impeded the detraction?
Response 1. The Superior of the defamer is held from charity to compel the subject to restore reputation; indeed from justice, if he is pastor or Bishop.
Response 2. The Superior of the defamed person likewise per se is held from charity to provide for the restitution of reputation; not, however, from justice, even if he is pastor or Bishop, because from that virtue he is not held to provide for the temporal good of the subject.
Response 3. If there is question of the Superior of both, and the defamed person implores the authority of the Superior, more probably he is held from justice to take care of the restitution of reputation, because in the case he seems to act as a judge, who from justice speaks the law (St. Alphonsus, III, 980).